Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762307AbYARClw (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:41:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762066AbYARCkz (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:40:55 -0500 Received: from waste.org ([66.93.16.53]:40339 "EHLO waste.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762158AbYARCkx (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:40:53 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ramdisk driver: make rd_size non-static From: Matt Mackall To: Andrew Morton Cc: Byron Bradley , linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nick Piggin , Russell King In-Reply-To: <20080117182851.f9177571.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1200621737-1458-1-git-send-email-byron.bbradley@gmail.com> <20080117182851.f9177571.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:39:23 -0600 Message-Id: <1200623963.4001.5.camel@cinder.waste.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1548 Lines: 41 On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 18:28 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:02:17 +0000 Byron Bradley wrote: > > > In arch/arm/kernel/setup.c:setup_ramdisk(), rd_size is set from the > > boot tags. The replacement ramdisk driver has rd_size as static > > which causes linking to fail when ramdisk is built-in. > > > > but... > > > diff --git a/drivers/block/brd.c b/drivers/block/brd.c > > index 5ef1d26..8536480 100644 > > --- a/drivers/block/brd.c > > +++ b/drivers/block/brd.c > > @@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static struct block_device_operations brd_fops = { > > * And now the modules code and kernel interface. > > */ > > static int rd_nr; > > -static int rd_size = CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM_SIZE; > > +int rd_size = CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM_SIZE; > > module_param(rd_nr, int, 0); > > MODULE_PARM_DESC(rd_nr, "Maximum number of brd devices"); > > module_param(rd_size, int, 0); > > rd_size is a module parameter so it is settable via the > syntax-which-i-can-never-remember. rd.rd_size=1024 or something like that. > > If that's all sane, do we have some back-compat reason to continue to > support the special and duplicative rd_size parameter? Only insofar as we're still supporting ramdisks in the first place. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/